Fermilab might beat the LHC to the Higgs bosun

[Smersh]

<p>This news is about a week old now, but I didn't see a thread so thought I'd start this one.</p><p>Story from the BBC</p><p><strong><font color="#000080">Europe's particle physics lab, Cern, is losing ground rapidly in the race to discover the elusive Higgs boson, or "God particle", its US rival claims. <br /><br />The particle, whose existence has been predicted by theoreticians, would help to explain why matter has mass. <br /><br />Finding the Higgs is a major goal of Cern's Large Hadron Collider (LHC). <br /><br />But the US Fermilab says the odds of its Tevatron accelerator detecting the famed particle first are now 50-50 at worst, and up to 96% at best. &nbsp; &nbsp;</font></strong></p><p><font color="#000080">Full story: <strong>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7893689.stm</strong></font></p><p>I realise there are other experiments, but since the Higgs bosun is touted as the flagship project for the Large Hadron Collider, does that mean we may be left with a gigantic $6 billion "white elephant" hole running around below France and Switzerland, if Fermilab gets there first?&nbsp;</p><p><strong><font color="#000080"><br />&nbsp;</font></strong></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <h1 style="margin:0pt;font-size:12px">----------------------------------------------------- </h1><p><font color="#800000"><em>Lady Nancy Astor: "Winston, if you were my husband, I'd poison your tea."<br />Churchill: "Nancy, if you were my wife, I'd drink it."</em></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Website / forums </strong></font></p> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<font color="#800000">...Harvey Newman, a Caltech physics professor who is heading a group of scientists conducting research at CERN</font><font color="#800000">... said, Fermilab's accelerator may be only strong enough to show the likelihood of the Higgs, without providing the level of certainty that would classify its findings as a discovery.</font><p><font color="#800000">Joe Lykken, a senior scientist at Fermilab in the Chicago suburb of Batavia, agreed.... </font><font color="#800000">"The Tevatron will never be taken as the last word and we will need the LHC to nail down whether it really is the Higgs." </font>http://news.aol.com/article/fermilab-european-accelerator-race-for/353944</p><p>The value of the LHC should not be tied to the discovery of the Higgs.&nbsp; I'm rooting for the Higgs to be discovered by Fermilab.&nbsp; That would make the anticipation of the LHC coming on line that much more exciting.&nbsp; Far from rendering the LHC moot or anticlamatic, it would lead to more expectations for what the LHC will find out about the Higgs that is beyond the capability of Fermilab, and what it will find beyond the Higgs. &nbsp; </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>...4The value of the LHC should not be tied to the discovery of the Higgs.&nbsp; I'm rooting for the Higgs to be discovered by Fermilab.&nbsp; That would make the anticipation of the LHC coming on line that much more exciting.&nbsp; Far from rendering the LHC moot or anticlamatic, it would lead to more expectations for what the LHC will find out about the Higgs that is beyond the capability of Fermilab, and what it will find beyond the Higgs. &nbsp; <br />Posted by centsworth_II</DIV><br /><br />Well put c_II. That's how I feel as well. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[BoJangles]

I put my $10 on them never finding the higgs, i personally think subatomic physics has a long way to go. Though who am i to say. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">-------------- </font></p><p align="center"><font size="1" color="#808080"><em>Let me start out with the standard disclaimer ... I am an idiot, I know almost nothing, I haven’t taken calculus, I don’t work for NASA, and I am one-quarter Bulgarian sheep dog.  With that out of the way, I have several stupid questions... </em></font></p><p align="center"><font size="1" color="#808080"><em>*** A few months blogging can save a few hours in research ***</em></font></p> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<font color="#333399"><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I put my $10 on them never finding the higgs...<br /> Posted by BoJangles</DIV></font><br />Never finding it because you think it doesn't exist?&nbsp; Do you think they will find something else? Or do you think nothing new will be found by the LHC? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[BoJangles]

<p style="margin:0cm0cm10pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;line-height:115%;font-family:'Verdana','sans-serif'">hrm I don&rsquo;t necessarily believe in the higgs at this stage; I understand that it is predicted, but it just seems too easy. I doubt they will be unifying the quantum world with relativity either. I believe the true nature of the universe may potentially have a few more tricks up its sleeve yet.</span></p><p style="margin:0cm0cm10pt" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:7.5pt;line-height:115%;font-family:'Verdana','sans-serif'">Though I do believe they will find a whole new range of exotic particles which may lead the way for even more research.</span></p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">-------------- </font></p><p align="center"><font size="1" color="#808080"><em>Let me start out with the standard disclaimer ... I am an idiot, I know almost nothing, I haven’t taken calculus, I don’t work for NASA, and I am one-quarter Bulgarian sheep dog.  With that out of the way, I have several stupid questions... </em></font></p><p align="center"><font size="1" color="#808080"><em>*** A few months blogging can save a few hours in research ***</em></font></p> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<p><font color="#333399"><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>hrm I don&rsquo;t necessarily believe in the higgs at this stage; I understand that it is predicted, but it just seems too easy<br /> Posted by BoJangles</DIV></font></p><p>The history of particle physics has many cases of particles being predicted long before their discovery.&nbsp; I don't think any of it was too easy, including the Higgs, if it is found.&nbsp; As seems to be the case in science, if the Higgs is found it will probably pose many more new questions than it answers. I don't see the road ahead being easy at all, Higgs or no Higgs.</p><p>edited list from&nbsp; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_particle_discoveries</p><p>1932 - Neutron discovered... (predicted by Rutherford in 1920)<br />1932 - Positron discovered... (proposed by Paul Dirac in 1927)<br />1947 - Pion discovered... (predicted by Hideki Yukawa in 1935)<br />1956 - Neutrino detected... (proposed by Wolfgang Pauli in 1931)<br />1969 - ...discovery of the up quark, down quark, and strange quark... (predicted in 1963).<br />1974 - J/&psi; particle, demonstrating the existence of the charm quark (proposed by Bjorken and Glashow in 1964)<br />1977 - Upsilon particle discovered... demonstrating the existence of the bottom quark (proposed in 1973)<br />1983 - W and Z bosons discovered... (predicted in detail by Sheldon Glashow, Abdus Salam, and Steven Weinberg)</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[BoJangles]

<p><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:'Verdana','sans-serif'">Fair enough, and I&rsquo;m in no position to dispute it, though I&rsquo;m well aware of the nature of predictions, the higgs,&nbsp;and the history of science in this regards.</span></p><p><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:'Verdana','sans-serif'">Just as a side note the CMB was&nbsp;also predicted by many theories, however my main point and the one you should quote me on is, I think the nature of the universe may have many more tricks up its sleeve yet. The other is my $10 bet which states the higgs will not be found by the LHC.</span></p><p><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:'Verdana','sans-serif'">Ps&nbsp;The baiting&nbsp;was a little redundent, if you have something to say just say it.&nbsp;</span></p><span style="font-size:7.5pt;font-family:'Verdana','sans-serif'"></span>&nbsp; <p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">-------------- </font></p><p align="center"><font size="1" color="#808080"><em>Let me start out with the standard disclaimer ... I am an idiot, I know almost nothing, I haven’t taken calculus, I don’t work for NASA, and I am one-quarter Bulgarian sheep dog.  With that out of the way, I have several stupid questions... </em></font></p><p align="center"><font size="1" color="#808080"><em>*** A few months blogging can save a few hours in research ***</em></font></p> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<p><font color="#333399"><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>...I think the nature of the universe may have many more tricks up its sleeve yet... Posted by BoJangles</DIV> </font>I think this is the general consensus.&nbsp; The days of declaring that a full understanding is around the corner are over. </p><p><font color="#333399">Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Ps&nbsp;The baiting&nbsp;was a little redundent, if you have something to say just say it.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; <br /> Posted by BoJangles</DIV></font> Huh?</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The baiting&nbsp;was a little redundent, if you have something to say just say it.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; <br />Posted by BoJangles</DIV><br /><br />What baiting are you talking about? Looked like a good discussion to me! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[BoJangles]

<p>Oops my apologise to censtworth_II, no dramas, a smiley face may have negated the tone a little. &nbsp;</p><p>For all the efforts of LHC, isn't thier a bigger one comming online in a couple of years? or is that a more distance project.</p><p>Personally id love to work for a place like that as a data cruncher, or just an assistants assistant offsider bottlewasher</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">-------------- </font></p><p align="center"><font size="1" color="#808080"><em>Let me start out with the standard disclaimer ... I am an idiot, I know almost nothing, I haven’t taken calculus, I don’t work for NASA, and I am one-quarter Bulgarian sheep dog.  With that out of the way, I have several stupid questions... </em></font></p><p align="center"><font size="1" color="#808080"><em>*** A few months blogging can save a few hours in research ***</em></font></p> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<p><font color="#333399"><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>For all the efforts of LHC, isn't thier a bigger one comming online in a couple of years?<br /> Posted by BoJangles</DIV></font><br />I'm not aware of any plans to build a collider larger than the LHC.&nbsp; It is going to be in a class of its own for years to come, and in fact may be the last of its kind.</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[Smersh]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'> ... For all the efforts of LHC, isn't thier a bigger one comming online in a couple of years? or is that a more distance project ...&nbsp; <br /> Posted by BoJangles</DIV> &nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>According to the last paragraph in this article that was published nearly a year ago in The Economist, the next generation of particle accelerators could be much smaller, because of laser technology:</p><p><font color="#000080"><strong>Femtosecond lasers can also be used to interact with other materials and generate particle beams for experiments, says Karl Krushelnick, of the University of Michigan. This could shrink the size and cost of building giant accelerators, which produce sub-atomic particles. Dr Krushelnick thinks laser-powered particle generators could fit into the basements of universities, if not on laboratory benches. That could mean the enormous Large Hadron Collider, now nearing completion inside a 27km tunnel in Geneva at a cost of some $5 billion, is the last of its kind.&nbsp;</strong></font></p><p><strong>http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10918079&nbsp;</strong></p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <h1 style="margin:0pt;font-size:12px">----------------------------------------------------- </h1><p><font color="#800000"><em>Lady Nancy Astor: "Winston, if you were my husband, I'd poison your tea."<br />Churchill: "Nancy, if you were my wife, I'd drink it."</em></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Website / forums </strong></font></p> </div>

 

[michaelmozina]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I'm not aware of any plans to build a collider larger than the LHC.&nbsp; It is going to be in a class of its own for years to come, and in fact may be the last of its kind.&nbsp; <br /> Posted by centsworth_II</DIV></p><p>Assuming the Higgs is found, it could be argued that there isn't any particular need of anything more powerful than LHC. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> It seems to be a natural consequence of our points of view to assume that the whole of space is filled with electrons and flying electric ions of all kinds. - Kristian Birkeland </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Assuming the Higgs is found, it could be argued that there isn't any particular need of anything more powerful than LHC. <br />Posted by michaelmozina</DIV><br /><br />I have to disagree. There could be plenty of things out there to be found; some suspected and some unkown and unsuspected. When you push the frontiers, more often than not there are surprises; not only in answers, but in questions <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[michaelmozina]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I have to disagree. There could be plenty of things out there to be found; some suspected and some unkown and unsuspected. When you push the frontiers, more often than not there are surprises; not only in answers, but in questions <br /> Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV></p><p>I hear your point.&nbsp; I did say "one could argue", not necessrily "I believe". &nbsp; I think however that it would be very difficult to justify bulding another collider once/assuming the Higgs is identified, particularly in this economic environment.&nbsp;&nbsp; What would be the primary justification for doing so?&nbsp; "We might find something unexpected and new."?&nbsp; "We're still curious if there is more to be discovered"?&nbsp; My guess is that if/once the Higgs is identified experimentally, the only valid justification for something bigger than LHC is really only "pure scientific curiousity".&nbsp; I don't think that would fly with most governements at the moment.&nbsp; </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> It seems to be a natural consequence of our points of view to assume that the whole of space is filled with electrons and flying electric ions of all kinds. - Kristian Birkeland </div>

 

[DrRocket]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I have to disagree. There could be plenty of things out there to be found; some suspected and some unkown and unsuspected. When you push the frontiers, more often than not there are surprises; not only in answers, but in questions <br />Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV></p><p>Yep.</p><p>The chances of the LHC providing exciting new insights are about 100%.&nbsp; The chances of it answering all questions and ending the quest for a deeper understanding of fundamental physical laws are about 0.</p><p>There are way too many gaps and inconsistencies in our current state of knowledge to expect research to end any time in the forseeable future.&nbsp; <br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I hear your point.&nbsp; I did say "one could argue", not necessrily "I believe". &nbsp; I think however that it would be very difficult to justify bulding another collider once/assuming the Higgs is identified, particularly in this economic environment.&nbsp;&nbsp; What would be the primary justification for doing so?&nbsp; "We might find something unexpected and new."?&nbsp; "We're still curious if there is more to be discovered"?&nbsp; My guess is that if/once the Higgs is identified experimentally, the only valid justification for something bigger than LHC is really only "pure scientific curiousity".&nbsp; I don't think that would fly with most governements at the moment.&nbsp; <br />Posted by michaelmozina</DIV><br /><br />I agree. In the current world economy, I can't see anything of&nbsp;a larger&nbsp;scale being built in my lifetime, which is most likely shorter than yours <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[BoJangles]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I agree. In the current world economy, I can't see anything of&nbsp;a larger&nbsp;scale being built in my lifetime, which is most likely shorter than yours <br />Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV><br /><br />I thought i saw something on a linear collider in the US that will work up to 1tev <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#808080">-------------- </font></p><p align="center"><font size="1" color="#808080"><em>Let me start out with the standard disclaimer ... I am an idiot, I know almost nothing, I haven’t taken calculus, I don’t work for NASA, and I am one-quarter Bulgarian sheep dog.  With that out of the way, I have several stupid questions... </em></font></p><p align="center"><font size="1" color="#808080"><em>*** A few months blogging can save a few hours in research ***</em></font></p> </div>

 

[michaelmozina]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I agree. In the current world economy, I can't see anything of&nbsp;a larger&nbsp;scale being built in my lifetime, which is most likely shorter than yours <br /> Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV></p><p>I'm afraid I'm not exactly a spring chicken myself, and I'm pretty sure LHC is the most powerful collider I'll see in my lifetime as well.&nbsp; I'm just hoping the get the thng working soon.&nbsp; I'm getting ansy.&nbsp; I wanna see them smash something together. &nbsp; </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> It seems to be a natural consequence of our points of view to assume that the whole of space is filled with electrons and flying electric ions of all kinds. - Kristian Birkeland </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<p>It looks like they are thinking about running the LHC through the winter, at very high cost.&nbsp; I wonder if Fermilab has lit a fire under them?&nbsp; What's the rush? </p><p><font color="#800000">"...Then they will run at 5 TeV per beam with the goal of collecting 200 inverse picobarns of luminosity.</font></p> <p><font color="#800000">To do this, they must run during the winter months December 09 &ndash; February 2010. CERN accelerators do not normally run during the winter months as the cost of electricity is 3 times higher than for the rest of the year. The additional electric bill for running the LHC during these months is $8M Euros.</font></p> <p><font color="#800000">It&rsquo;s not clear how the lab is going to pay the additional electricity costs and the lab staff is clearly concerned about cuts, but management thinks it is manageable." <font color="#333399">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2009/02/24/chamonix-summary-cern/</font></font></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[centsworth_II]

<p><font color="#000080"><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I thought i saw something on a linear collider in the US that will work up to 1tev <br /> Posted by BoJangles</DIV></font><br />The LHC is designed to run up to 14TeV.&nbsp;&nbsp; Smaller accelerators may be useful in doing specialized experiments, but no other accelerator, existing or planned, will be able to achieve the energy levels of the LHC.&nbsp; Maybe not even the LHC will achieve its design energy level. (LOL)&nbsp;&nbsp; From the same article I linked in my previous post:</p><p><font color="#800000">"It&rsquo;s not clear that the LHC will ever run at the design energy of 14 TeV. There is a problem with the number of expected magnet quenches as one tunes the beam from 6.5 to 7 TeV. Namely, it&rsquo;s alarmingly high. They don&rsquo;t know why yet, but are working on it. It is possible that the maximum energy the machine will ultimately reach is 13 TeV in the center of mass....</font> http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2009/02/24/chamonix-summary-cern/</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

Just a test post to ensure the forum is working correctly-MW